Convention between the United States and Other Powers Establishing an International Law Commission

1912 ◽  
Vol 6 (S3) ◽  
pp. 173-177
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The Fifty-Fifth Session of the International Law Commission

2004 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Matheson ◽  
Sara Bickler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Of Greece ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission held its fifty-fifth session in Geneva from May 5 to June 6, and from July 7 to August 8, 2003, under the chairmanship of Enrique Candioti of Argentina. The Commission elected Roman Kolodkin of the Russian Federation, Constantin Economides of Greece, Teodor Melescanu of Romania, and Michael Matheson of the United States to fill the vacancies resulting from the death of Valery Kuznetsov of the Russian Federation, the election of Bruno Simma of Germany and Peter Tomka of Slovakia to the International Court of Justice, and the resignation of Robert Rosenstock of the United States.

Size of the Mission

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter explores Article 11 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which deals with the appropriate size of the diplomatic mission. Before the mission, both of the sovereign States involved can agree on its size. If there is no prior agreement, then the receiving party may require the size to be reasonable and normal. The Article also states that the receiving State may refuse to accept officials of a particular category. The International Law Commission decided that a balance must be struck between the interests of the sending and the receiving State. The chapter then highlights the controversy that emerged due to the text used in the second paragraph that certain nations such as United States became unhappy with the phrase ‘that the receiving State may refuse to accept officials of a particular category’ even though the Commission stresses that it non-discriminatory and is used in the context of the first paragraph regarding the size of the mission.

The 2008 United States-India Nuclear Co-operation Agreement and the Work of the International Law Commission on International Liability for Injurious Consequences Arising Out of Acts not Prohibited by International Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert P. BARNIDGE
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Government ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission

This article examines the 2008 Agreement for Co-operation Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy [“123 Agreement”] within the context of the International Law Commission's (ILC) work on international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law. Attention is paid to three issues in particular, namely how international environmental law has developed to interact with vaguely worded environmental protection provisions, such as those in the 123 Agreement, and the role of experts in this regard, the issue of civil nuclear liability, and the question of what international law might require for environmental impact assessments under the 123 Agreement to pass muster.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document